Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

I guess it will be helpful for treatment, to an extent, and also be helpful for research on HIV generally.

Seems like such a test will open some cans of worms for some people. Currently the party line is just to move on and not dwell on where and why and who. One reason of course being you couldn't know for sure. Another reason because of course just dealing with now and the future is important, from an individual perspective.

Logged

ďFrom each, according to his ability; to each, according to his needĒ 1875 K Marx

The breakthrough is beneficial for those with the AIDS virus because the information can be used to predict the rate at which the disease will develop.

The information can also be used to decide when to start treatment.

Codswallop. It can't really because different people's bodies deal with hiv a little differently.

For example, I know I was infected in the spring of '97. I know of three others who were infected at roughly the same time - and from the same person. (Two of us are women. The other woman infected two men early on in her own infection.) It has been clinically established that we all have the same strain, and we were all diagnosed in February 2001.

One had to start treatment right away as she was diagnosed with aids. One of the men was able to wait three years post-diagnosis and the other was able to wait five years post-diagnosis.

I'm nearly at the fourteen year point (ten years post-diagnosis) and I still don't need treatment - although it looks like I may be getting close to that time.

So I'm firmly of the opinion that knowing your infection date will not give you any real insight to when you'll progress to the point where you need meds. There may be a VERY general "rule of thumb" concerning "average" progression time-lines, but there are just too many people who fall outside the alleged average to make knowing your infection date all that important. What's important is where you are at now and what your trend looks like over time.

It's likely to be an expensive test and therefore an expensive way to satisfy curiosity, but little more than that.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Codswallop. It can't really because different people's bodies deal with hiv a little differently.

For example, I know I was infected in the spring of '97. I know of three others who were infected at roughly the same time - and from the same person. (Two of us are women. The other woman infected two men early on in her own infection.) It has been clinically established that we all have the same strain, and we were all diagnosed in February 2001.

One had to start treatment right away as she was diagnosed with aids. One of the men was able to wait three years post-diagnosis and the other was able to wait five years post-diagnosis.

I'm nearly at the fourteen year point (ten years post-diagnosis) and I still don't need treatment - although it looks like I may be getting close to that time.

So I'm firmly of the opinion that knowing your infection date will not give you any real insight to when you'll progress to the point where you need meds. There may be a VERY general "rule of thumb" concerning "average" progression time-lines, but there are just too many people who fall outside the alleged average to make knowing your infection date all that important. What's important is where you are at now and what your trend looks like over time.

It's likely to be an expensive test and therefore an expensive way to satisfy curiosity, but little more than that.

I'll go a step further. It seems like an expensive tool that will be primarily used to assign blame and assist prosecution.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

Couldnt it be useful information for studying the epidemic at the level of population, and for epidemiology? I think so. All knowledge helps in my opinion. Certainly this would be interesting at the level of national or local statistics for infection rates.

Obviously its of limited use at the level of the individual.

And scientists wouldn't be using the tool the way you just worried about. Maybe just some HIV+ people, if they could get doctors, lawyers, and justice to go along.

Logged

ďFrom each, according to his ability; to each, according to his needĒ 1875 K Marx

Couldnt it be useful information for studying the epidemic at the level of population, and for epidemiology? I think so.

How, exactly?

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

I'll go a step further. It seems like an expensive tool that will be primarily used to assign blame and assist prosecution.

Exactly. I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets a chill reading stuff like this. Of course, I suppose we're already considered part of the Gloom & Doom Crew, aren't we?

For my part, my docs have always sworn up and down that I was infected for several years prior to diagnosis in 2004. Yet I know that I had fairly regular HIV tests during the late 90's and up through at least 2001 that said otherwise. I'm one of those who went from infection to AIDS in about 2 1/2 years.

Exactly. I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets a chill reading stuff like this. Of course, I suppose we're already considered part of the Gloom & Doom Crew, aren't we?

Testify. I have not seen many of my more cynical notions disabused, and certainly not in the realm of HIV science, and most certainly not here.

There is a great deal of hope regarding HIV. You gotta know where to look though.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

And scientists wouldn't be using the tool the way you just worried about. Maybe just some HIV+ people, if they could get doctors, lawyers, and justice to go along.

Oh don't worry, "some" (quite a few, actually) people would definitely want it done and they would definitely find doctors willing to administer the test.

How do I know this? I know this because of all the people in the Am I Infected forum who find doctors willing to administer PCR tests for non-risk situations, and even worse, administer DNA PCR tests which aren't even licensed or approved for diagnostic use.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

It's a bad (factually inaccurate) news report of an experimental and unvalidated technique.

In the UK on diagnosis you get a test which will say if you got HIV in the last 6 months or before, that's all. This is standard of care, cos most new patients want to know as far as they can know. It has been mooted this info might become evidence in a criminal prosecution, but the test has a wide error margin so perhaps not useful in court and easy to challenge if it is used.

Perhaps it's just me, but it really makes no difference to me when I was infected. When I received the phone call telling me I was HIV+, the first thought in my mind was not when did this happen, but what do I do now. Like Mr. thunter34 I classify myself as a slut and although I can pretty much pin point when I was infected it really just doesn't matter because in the end it was my responsibility to take preventive actions and I didn't. As Ann said HIV effects everyone differently so does it really matter when one was infected as far as treatment. For me I determined my course of action based on the numbers I had from my initial blood work. I suppose there may be some value in a test like this for research/statistical reasons but really can't think of any reason that it needs to be a regular test for HIV+ people.

Logged

"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it." Nelson Mandela

I have never been curious about who infected me . This news story if true is unsettling for many reasons to me .

I have seen it here countless times , people vowing revenge and prosecution for the villain who made them have risky sex . I view this test as yet another tool for those who refuse to take responsibility for they're own deeds .

Hey I agree that individuals could use such tests and info wastefully or to damage others.

Im not an epidemiologist or HIV prevention specialist, so I'll send a note to a friend who is and get back.

My thinking was that this info would be of use in "population-based health care" contexts. So this is something very much on the minds of health commissioners, development specialists, etc. The idea is to assess the needs of a population and improve the health of the population. The individual is considered as a numerator and the population is the denominator. In that sense doctors need to treat patients as individuals but also improve outcomes for the population.

Health commissioners and public health budgets naturally need to consider collective outcomes, both for subset populations (those at risk for a disease, those with a disease) and the entire collective impacted (e.g. a state or country, with limited funds, etc.)

So for example population-based health care is very much part of treatment as prevention - for example the move in certain European cities to encourage universal testing of gay men and encourage (and be willing to pay for) universal treatment at diagnosis. As I reported here once before, this is a trend in Geneva and my French HIV activist friends say its been topical in Paris for a few years.

So I would think date of infection would be a statistics epidemiologists would be interested in. In an imperfect but aggressive push for universal testing and treatment. An uptick of recent infections might indicate failing prevention campaigns, or increase in risk taking, or some other factor, and not simply an uptick in testing. A fall in recent infections with a constant rate of diagnosis, however, would push public health workers to congratulate themselves on prevention and testing programs.

And what about neutral knowledge of the disease itself. If you had this information for a period of 10 years, you'd have more knowledge about how HIV plays out in a population. I would say it might be information that gives clues to the evolution of the virus in a population, as well. I dunno.

I don't think its doom and gloom to predict as some of you are. But its also important to see science as a bit neutral and keep in mind our own ignorance about things that eggheads on these topics might know more about. I could imagine, also, a doctor wanting to know this information for an individual patient in some cases.

« Last Edit: January 21, 2011, 04:29:37 PM by mecch »

Logged

ďFrom each, according to his ability; to each, according to his needĒ 1875 K Marx

I'm 99.9% sure I got it from my ex partner but I'd love to know for sure. It wouldn't change anything as far as treatment (I'm already on treatment) but it would give me some perspective, on a personal level.

I'm 99.9% sure I got it from my ex partner but I'd love to know for sure. It wouldn't change anything as far as treatment (I'm already on treatment) but it would give me some perspective, on a personal level.

What perspective would it give you my dear? That you only took it up the ass raw outside of your relationship 00.1% of the time? I mean, either you did or you didn't.

I know I tested poz in 1992 and had teh aids by then; but it'd be interesting to know if I was infected in 1984/1985 (as I believe it happened in 84) and have really been living with HIV that long? Did it actually take the decade I think it did to go from being infected to in the hospital with aids? It could shine a different light on some of the health issues I had in my twenties.

Also the date would help me know whether I got it from one of the nice Southern boys I was screwing,or if I got the Yankee version when my first late partner was screwing me?

I guess it would be nice to know which of the guy's business trips he infected me and whether I was being fucked bent over a chair or ankles behind my ears in bed. It might explain why one is my favorite position and the other isn't.

Logged

"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it." Nelson Mandela

I would take the test. If it really worked, I would be interested to know. I have been pretty sure of exactly when I was infected--August 2001. That was the only high risk encounter I can come up with and I developed all the symptoms I've described here before. However, learning my former partner has AIDS threw a small wrench into that. We were last together in 1995, so it would seem unlikely it was from him with my current numbers. But, it is possible.

It would be interesting to know whether I've had the virus for 16 years. It wouldn't be to blame him. In fact, I would prefer that it came from him and not who I believe gave it to me. It would also prove the medical folks wrong who said (in front of my current partner) that I must have just recently been infected with my numbers. I didn't ask them how long they thought I had it, and I felt it was irresponsible to say that in front of my partner. That could have caused a huge fight with many couples. I'm sure statements like that have caused people to break up. I've seen some docs at thebody answer questions from spouses about how long their partner has been infected. I've seen them make timelines when they shouldn't. I remember thinking when I read it that I bet that caused a huge fight.

Anything they find concerning this disease is helpful. Of course ,this particular test ,most assuredly, will send shivers down the spines of those who purposely infect others Or have sex without disclosure.

Anything they find concerning this disease is helpful. Of course ,this particular test ,most assuredly, will send shivers down the spines of those who purposely infect others Or have sex without disclosure.

v

Nice "v" -- accusing those here who offer objections to this testing as Typhoid Marys. What a lame, weak argument to make.

What perspective would it give you my dear? That you only took it up the ass raw outside of your relationship 00.1% of the time? I mean, either you did or you didn't.

I had an incident where a condom broke many years ago and I got tested once after that but maybe it was too soon after the incident. I then was too scared to get tested for several years. I always used condoms without fail, whether topping or bottoming and only stopped doing so with my last partner.

I'd be curious if that incident many years ago did it or if in fact it was my ex.

And, as Ted & Mikey mention, It'd be nice to know how long I've had this in order to really gauge how my immune system was holding up when I started meds. In my case probably 5 years but maybe 10.

I still don't understand what "it would be nice to know" means in terms of treatment going forward. It would change zilch. You folks whinge endlessly about funding for HIV related stuff for vaccines, but then also seem to want to fork over money for things of dubious use just to quench your curiosity? Seriously?

And, as Ted & Mikey mention, It'd be nice to know how long I've had this in order to really gauge how my immune system was holding up when I started meds. In my case probably 5 years but maybe 10.

I would like to know how this makes any difference in treating ones HIV. So you were infected 10 yrs ago and start treatment now, X guy was infected 7 yrs ago and starts treatment now and I was infected let's say 2yrs ago and start treatment now. Seems to me all it does is reinforce the fact each of our bodies react differently to the virus. Your immune system has held up till the point of starting treatment and now it is time to start.

I think that it is far more personal, some just want to know who infected them.

Logged

"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it." Nelson Mandela

I still don't understand what "it would be nice to know" means in terms of treatment going forward. It would change zilch. You folks whinge endlessly about funding for HIV related stuff for vaccines, but then also seem to want to fork over money for things of dubious use just to quench your curiosity? Seriously?

I think you're jumping to conclusions. I too would like to just be able to pinpoint the exact date to sate curiosity. Not to attempt to hold the information over someone's head, but just to know. Do you know exactly who infected you and when? For me that information is a complete mystery and I'd be curious to find out the details.

No, just a pool of likely candidates, the faces of which are rather fuzzy after twenty three years (that I can recall, there may be some I've forgotten) -- oh yeah, only one I can remember the name of, Doug who I procured in the bathroom at the coke dealers apartment... classy! Add in the Venezuelan hustler (though I wasn't charged) with the green shag carpet in Harlem (add vodka and two hits of ecstasy) and the Dominican that shot not one but two loads up my ass al fresco from atop a filthy piece of used foam bedding on a roof in Chinatown (add more vodka and some acid).

The first raw ass load was five years prior to my diagnosis, the others were in the three years closer to my diagnosis. Knowing exactly which one would change nothing in my life. Nor does it absolve me of going five years with no AIDS testing while running around NYC with demon seed at the height of the epidemic -- assuredly half of the board members here have some variant of my strain, passed down through several generations of unsuspecting homosexuals.

Sorry, I just don't see the point of this exercise but it does seem to indicate some unresolved issues on the part of various members of the forums.

Sorry, I just don't see the point of this exercise but it does seem to indicate some unresolved issues on the part of various members of the forums.

Maybe for some, but for others it really is just idle curiosity. I mean I'm personally interested to know so that once I have finished my time machine I will know exactly which trick to go back and turn away from my younger self's door in order to prevent my infection.

And my point as stated earlier, which I will now reiterate since you glossed over it, is that "idle curiosity" has a real financial cost which could be spent on other HIV related things. Now go take your Mepron.

And my point as stated earlier, which I will now reiterate since you glossed over it, is that "idle curiosity" has a real financial cost which could be spent on other HIV related things. Now go take your Mepron.

It's yellow and gross, besides I have that AIDSy look that's so fashionable these days going on, would you take that away from me?

Anything they find concerning this disease is helpful. Of course ,this particular test ,most assuredly, will send shivers down the spines of those who purposely infect others Or have sex without disclosure.

v

What a dreadful way to attempt to smear fellow board members, and to start a flamewar. If you have nothing salient to add to the discussion, I suggest you leave this thread alone.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

And my point as stated earlier, which I will now reiterate since you glossed over it, is that "idle curiosity" has a real financial cost which could be spent on other HIV related things. Now go take your Mepron.

I have to strongly agree here. Save the expense of this little test and take one person off the waiting list here in Georgia.

I have to strongly agree here. Save the expense of this little test and take one person off the waiting list here in Georgia.

We also have available to us full body scans. These very expensive scans are not covered by insurance, but they can detect certain cancers well before they manifest, as well as other abnormalities that might or might not give a person trouble in the future. They are excellent for those with idle curiosity.

Notwithstanding Newt's comment that the test to determine date of infection is inaccurate, flawed, and essentially of little real practical use, if someone wants to pay out of pocket to satisfy idle curiosity, then no one should criticize.

It would be your money, after all. I just can't imagine companies refining, developing, and marketing a nearly useless "tool" in hopes of getting big bucks from the deep pockets of people with HIV.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

Sorry, I just don't see the point of this exercise but it does seem to indicate some unresolved issues on the part of various members of the forums.

sorry after 18 to 26 years and my AIDS diagnosis, no resolved issues here. Just curiosity.

of course, this could be money better spent (maybe); but that can be said about a lot of things. I doubt many people would pay for this kind of testing or that it gets to be all that popular as many people (because of regular testing and risk exposures) already know close enough to not be as curious. So in the long run, the money will probably be negligible if you're talking about fixing ADAP or something. Also if Medicaid or Medicare doesn't pay for this test, then there would be no money to be spent on any other HIV-related issues anyway - insurance and personal money would have no bearing.

I think the various members of the forums, who can't understand the personal curiosity of wanting to know how long someone has actually been infected, must have some unresolved issues themselves. Sounding condescending and acting like other members aren't allowed to be different from you with different experiences, different curiosities and different interests works both ways. Sorry that some of us don't fit into the mold of your idea of group-think and actually wonder just how long we've actually been infected.

Strangely enough I was just thinking about this topic earlier today anyway. My mom found some old Polaroids that my Dad had taken of me in 1987. It's weird to look at it, remember back to then, and to contemplate on how I had probably already been HIV infected a few years (at least I think I was) and was already rushing headlong towards that AIDS diagnosis.

I think the various members of the forums, who can't understand the personal curiosity of wanting to know how long someone has actually been infected, must have some unresolved issues themselves.

I personally understand newly diagnosed people wondering this, and if such a test was accurate, and offered, and in no way contributed to our society's inability to medicate the sick and suffering, I would have no dog in that fight whatsoever.

I was fortunate, if that is the word, to know who infected me and when. But even if I had no such knowledge, almost twenty years into this disease, I have simply outgrown that person I was. I suspect that many of the people who wish to satisfy this curiosity are closer to veritas' mindset than Hellraiser's. And I also suspect that in time, Hellraiser will find more important, more relevant curiosities.

If this test, flawed or not, becomes available in the next few years and people like Hellraiser still want to utilize it, then I am wrong, it was not "idle" curiosity after all. And go for it, spend your money where you want.

That is not being condescending, I don't think.

However, I must reference Newt's comments over and over. We are having a discussion regarding a test that is not both not validated and experimental, and currently of no practical use in terms of pursuing litigation against those who may have infected a person.

However, insofar as speculative intellectual discussions are concerned, I was really floored by veritas' exhibition of his colors. Points taken and noted.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

of course, I wasn't commenting on your comments at all, so I certainly hope you didn't read anything that I wrote as directed towards anything that you wrote. Actually I must say though, that I was pleasantly surprised that we agreed about something - the payment issue of this kind of test.

However, suggesting that members have unresolved issues (ie mental, psychological problems/issues) sure sounded condescending when Philly wrote it. And maybe you didn't mean it that way Philly, but when you suggest that others are mentally unhealthy for not thinking like you about wanting to know when they were infected, then you are really are suggesting group think. (I said nothing about the cabal but I'm sure they'll chime in shortly, if not by the time I post this. ROFLMAO) Just because you don't want or care to know, doesn't mean that others might not be curious. Thankfully, we all think a little different, and are curious about different things, or the world would be a boring place.